DOCSLIB.ORG

Categorizing Humans, Animals, and Machines in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Categorizing Humans, Animals, and Machines in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Senior Honors Projects Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island 2009 Categorizing Humans, Animals, and Machines in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein Martha Bellows University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Bellows, Martha, "Categorizing Humans, Animals, and Machines in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein" (2009). Senior Honors Projects. Paper 129. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/129http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/129 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Honors Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Martha Bellows Major: English and Spanish Email: [email protected] Title of Project: Categorizing Humans, Animals, and Machines in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein Faculty Sponsor: Dr. Galen Johnson Abstract From Plato to Descartes and Kant and now to modern day, there is a general idea that pervades Western society. This idea is about the uniqueness and superiority of the human being. We are rational and conscious beings that apparently stand alone in the world, separated intellectually from animals and biologically from machines. The relationship between humans, animals, and machines is a tumultuous one and it is not easily definable. For many classical philosophers, this relationship has always been a hierarchy. Humans are on the top and animals and machines fall somewhere below. These beliefs have created a distinct category for the three terms that leaves no room for overlap. Because of the great disparity between these groups, the animal and machine have come to be known as the “Other.” This title demonstrates that they are markedly disregarded and disrespected. All of the points indicated in regard to the relationship between humans, animals, and machines can be seen in the Frankenstein novel. Victor Frankenstein, the maker of the creature, has all of the typical ideas about the rarity and dominance inherent in humans. When working on his creature, he thinks of everything mechanistically. The human remains that he has collected are simply parts in the machine he wants to build. The whole creation is just a scientific procedure. What Frankenstein is doing is trying to make an artificial human or a cyborg. Once his experiment is complete, the creature becomes alive. He is not human-like in appearance and he cannot talk. Frankenstein flees in terror from the monster that he has brought into existence. He treats his work as some sort of animal not worthy of his attention any more. The creature runs away as well and is treated by everyone like a demon. He hides and it is during this time that he learns to read, write, and speak. He has learned what humans prize the most as something that is their own: language. At this point in time when the creature is most clearly human, he still has the qualities of animal and machine. Frankenstein’s creature has blurred the distinct categories of humans, animals, and machines. By analyzing the most contemporary philosophical writing on the boundaries between humans, animals, and machines as well as recent critical analyses on Frankenstein regarding these categories, a more unified view of the separate groups emerges. Project Before beginning it is important to note two problematic terms in this essay. The first term is animal . While it is true that humans are animals, many people in today’s society and many philosophers throughout time consider the term human different from the term animal . There is constant talk about the difference between humans and animals even though humans are biologically animals as well. During the essay, for simplicity and understanding, the term animal will continue to signify all non-human animals. By using animal in this regard, it is vital not to apply many of the negative connotations that people think of when the term is used today. The term is only used to distinguish from humans and non-human animals and nothing more. The second term that causes problems is creature . In many situations this term is used negatively or derogatorily but that is not the aim when using it in this essay. It is the only term to describe Frankenstein’s creation without evoking prejudicial sentiments like monster and fiend generally would. It is necessary to realize that Mary Shelley does not use the term creature negatively either. She uses it to describe humans such as when Elizabeth calls Justine her “fellow-creature” (81) and also when the creature says upon first seeing Agatha that she is a “young creature” (99). For Shelley, creature is more a term of endearment and not something offensive. Because of this and the fact that Frankenstein’s creation has no name, he will be referred to as the creature . Throughout the essay, bear in mind the significance of these two terms. Humans are special. This is the idea that has been circulating for many hundreds of years. It begins as early as the popular philosopher Plato and lasts up to more contemporary and well-known philosophers such as Descartes and Kant. This concept is also seen in many literatures with one in particular being Frankenstein . For these philosophers and literatures, human beings are unique and superior to the other animals and non-animals that surround them. The uniqueness and superiority is mainly attributed to a human’s ability to rationalize and possession of a consciousness. These qualities are said to exist only in humans and this is why humans are regarded so highly. Because of this, other animals and non-animals are disregarded and placed somewhere below humans. A hierarchy is then established putting humans at the top and everything non-human is beneath. Two main philosophers that make these ideas prevalent and pervasive even in today’s society are Descartes and Kant. Their concepts also are evident in Frankenstein . What is apparent both in their beliefs and in Frankenstein in regards to humans and non-animal is that there is a strong divide between the two categories. René Descartes lived in France from 1596-1650. He is known as the father of modern day philosophy and contributed greatly to the scientific revolution of the 17 th century. What is important in this discussion to note are his ideas concerning human nature and subsequently his ideas concerning animals. Descartes believes that human beings are composed of two parts: a body and a mind. The mind part can be considered to be a person’s consciousness. The consciousness or mind of humans is what makes them who they are. The mind of the human is immaterial and can survive death. It is also something that cannot be studied by science. To justify the existence of the human’s mind, Descartes points to language. This is the main idea that does not work to attribute a mind in animals. Animals are therefore distinctly different from humans. Leslie Stevenson and David L. Haberman say in their book on human nature that Descartes “argues that there is a distinction of kind rather than in degree between the innate mental faculties of humans and animals, picking out language as a distinctive component of human rationality” (114). In Discourse on Method , Descartes says that because non-humans do not have language, it “shows not merely that the beasts have less reason than men, but that they have no reason at all” (88). He goes on further to say that animals “have no intelligence at all” (89). According to Descartes, because non-humans do not possess rationality and therefore do not have a language, they are firmly separated from humans. As a result, he views animals as machines. As such, animals are unaware; they have no thoughts or consciousness and are like clocks. The apparent suffering that occurs during scientific experiments as Descartes views it is simply the animal reacting unemotionally to a stimulus. The animal has no feelings so humans can use them as needed. Because of the differences stated by Descartes between non-human animals and humans, a hierarchy is created. This hierarchy maintains views from before and stabilizes it so that it is still apparent after the time of Descartes. Immanuel Kant, who lived in Germany from 1724 to 1804, constructs this same hierarchy of human above animal. He says that humans have “no direct duties” to animals. By saying this, Kant means that the duties humans have towards animals are “indirect duties toward humanity” (489). He thinks that if a person treats animals poorly, he or she would then treat humans in the same way so for people to be nice to other people, they must also be nice to animals. Kant goes on to say that “tender feelings toward dumb animals develop humane feelings towards mankind” (490). This is not to say, however, that animals are on the same level as humans. To begin with, Kant calls animals “dumb.” He thinks that animals are “not self conscious” and because of that, they are only a “means to an end” (489) with that end being humans. Kant later says that animals are “man’s instruments” (490). Animals are beneath humans so humans are allowed to use animals for their own purposes and disregard what might be best for the animal. After these two philosophers and in a period where the relationship between human and animal is well defined, Mary Shelley writes Frankenstein which is published in 1818. This book questions the animal/human structure that had been established for centuries especially the beliefs held by Descartes and Kant.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mary Shelley: Teaching and Learning Through Frankenstein Theresa M
    Forum on Public Policy Mary Shelley: Teaching and Learning through Frankenstein Theresa M. Girard, Adjunct Professor, Central Michigan University Abstract In the writing of Frankenstein, Mary Shelley was able to change the course of women’s learning, forever. Her life started from an elite standpoint as the child of Mary Wollstonecraft and William Godwin. As such, she was destined to grow to be a major influence in the world. Mary Shelley’s formative years were spent with her father and his many learned friends. Her adult years were spent with her husband, Percy Bysshe Shelley, and their literary friends. It was on the occasion of the Shelleys’ visit to Lord Byron at his summer home that Mary Shelley was to begin her novel which changed the course of women’s ideas about safety and the home. No longer were women to view staying in the home as a means to staying safe and secure. While women always knew that men could be unreliable, Mary Shelley openly acknowledged that fact and provided a forum from which it could be discussed. Furthermore, women learned that they were vulnerable and that, in order to insure their own safety, they could not entirely depend upon men to rescue them; in fact, in some cases, women needed to save themselves from the men in their lives, often with no one to turn to except themselves and other women. There are many instances where this is shown throughout Frankenstein, such as: Justine’s prosecution and execution and Elizabeth’s murder. Mary Shelley educated women in the most fundamental of ways and continues to do so through every reading of Frankenstein.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real "Monster" in Frankenstein
    ISSN 2380-5064 | Arsenal is published by the Augusta University Libraries | http://guides.augusta.edu/arsenal Volume 1, Issue 1 (2016) The Real "Monster" in Frankenstein David O. Urizar Citation Urizar, D. O. (2016). The Real "Monster" in Frankenstein. Arsenal: The undergraduate research journal of Augusta University, 1(1), 20-27. http://doi.org/10.21633/issn.2380.5064/f.2016.01.20 © 2016 Urizar. This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/) ISSN 2380-5064 10.21633/issn.2380.5064/f.2016.01.20 Real “Monster” in Frankenstein David O. Urizar Department of Biological Sciences College of Science and Mathematics Faculty Mentor: Todd Hoffman, Ph.D., Department of English and Foreign Languages The story of Frankenstein is typically seen as a battle between Victor Frankenstein and the “monster” of the story. However I argue that that the real “monster” of the story is in fact Victor Frankenstein who is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and that the “monster” is really just a delusions that Victor uses to cope with the idea that he in fact is the killer of the story. This concept is evident in the fact that no one in the story has ever seen both Victor Frankenstein and the “monster” alive in the same place. The characteristics of the “monster’ also point towards the idea that the “monster” could not possibly exist. Even the way that Victor acts throughout the book point to the idea that he does not really care for the safety of his loved ones.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion Questions for Frankenstein Written by Hailey Toporcer, Hiram College Class of 2019 Edited by Prof
    Discussion Questions for Frankenstein Written by Hailey Toporcer, Hiram College Class of 2019 Edited by Prof. Kirsten Parkinson As you read Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, either on your own or with a group, we invite you to use these questions to add layers to your discussion or thinking about the novel. The first section includes questions for each chapter of the novel; you will find questions reflecting on the book as a whole at the end. We have not included specific pages numbers as various editions have different page numbers, but the quotations are based on the 1831 edition of the novel. Discussion Questions for Each Chapter Letters I through IV 1. Frankenstein begins and ends with letters written by Robert Walton. Why do you think that Mary Shelley chose to have him frame the novel? How would your opinions of Victor Frankenstein and his creation differ if their story was told directly by Victor Frankenstein himself? What if the story was told solely by the creation? 2. Walton yearns for a friend, much like Victor Frankenstein’s creature does. What does this tell you about human nature? Is it in our nature to want companionship, someone to confide in, and someone to care for? 3. In Letter IV, Walton writes, “Yesterday the stranger said to me, “You may easily perceive, Captain Walton, that I have suffered great and unparalleled misfortunes. I had determined at one time that the memory of these evils should die with me, but you have won me to alter my determination. You seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been.
    [Show full text]
  • Frankenstein's Theatrical Doppelgänger
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2013-08-27 From Prometheus to Presumption: Frankenstein's Theatrical Doppelgänger Reid, Brittany Lee Alexandra Reid, B. L. (2013). From Prometheus to Presumption: Frankenstein's Theatrical Doppelgänger (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/26236 http://hdl.handle.net/11023/894 master thesis University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY From Prometheus to Presumption: Frankenstein’s Theatrical Doppelgänger by Brittany Reid A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH CALGARY, ALBERTA AUGUST, 2013 © Brittany Reid 2013 ii Abstract This thesis examines the Doppelgänger relationship between Victor Frankenstein and the Creature, as it is characterized through both Frankenstein and its first theatrical adaptation. With a specific focus on Richard Brinsley Peake’s 1823 gothic melodrama, Presumption; or, The Fate of Frankenstein I unpack how the novel’s cross-medium adaptation leads to a changed conception of the relationship of its central characters. In Frankenstein, Victor is the focal figure and acts as the Creature’s dominant counterpart. However, the characters’ cross-medium adaptation from page to stage inverts this Doppelgänger relationship from Shelley’s initial conception in the novel.
    [Show full text]
  • Mary Shelley: Life and Works British Romantic Indira Gandhi Literature National Open University School of Humanities
    BEGC -109 Mary Shelley: Life and Works British Romantic Indira Gandhi Literature National Open University School of Humanities Block 4 MARY SHELLEY: FRANKENSTEIN Unit 1 Mary Shelley: Life and Works 189 Unit 2 Frankenstein: A Gothic Novel 203 Unit 3 Frankenstein: Summary and Analysis 213 Unit 4 Frankenstein: Major Themes 229 187 Mary Shelley: Frankenstein BLOCK INTRODUCTION This Block will introduce you to one of the important After the completion of this block, you will be introduced toMary Shelley(1797-1851), also known as Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, a British novelist. You will • get introduced to the gothic tradition. • be familiarised with the major influential factors on the Gothic with special reference to Mary Shelley. • comprehend her effects worldwide. • trace her impacts on the later generations. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The material (pictures and passages) we have used is purely for educational purposes. Every effort has been made to trace the copyright holders of material reproduced in this book. Should any infringement have occurred, the publishers and editors apologize and will be pleased to make the necessary corrections in future editions of this book. 188 UNIT 1 Mary SHELLEY: LIFE AND WORKS Mary Shelley: Life and Works Structure 1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Infancy And Early Years 1.3 Challenge Preadolescence 1.4 Teenage 1.5 Mary's Relocation 1.6 Love Life 1.7 Mary's Journey To London 1.8 Mary and Her Personal Calamities 1.9 Mary's First Novel Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus 1.10 Story of "Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus 1.11 Other Works of Mary Shelley 1.12 Last Stage of Mary Shelley's Life 1.13 Let Us Sum Up 1.14 Questions and Answer Keys 1.15 Suggested Readings 1.0 OBJECTIVES It is evident that the life account of a famous novelist is a storehouse of facts and events which are essential to grasp the background of the author and the literary works.
    [Show full text]
  • Frankenstein in Mary Shelley’S Novel “Frankenstein”
    A DESCRIPTION OF THE MAIN CHARACTER OF FRANKENSTEIN IN MARY SHELLEY’S NOVEL “FRANKENSTEIN” A PAPER WRITTEN BY RAHMA KESUMA ANJANI REG. NO: 152202056 DIPLOMA III ENGLISH STUDY PROGRAM FACULTY OF CULTURE STUDY UNIVERSITY OF NORTH SUMATERA MEDAN 2018 UNIVERSITAS SUMATERA UTARA It has been Approved by Supervisor, Dra. Diah Rahayu Pratama. M.Pd NIP. 195612141986012001 Submitted to Faculty of Culture Study. University of North Sumatera in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Diploma III in English Study Program. Approved by Head of Diploma III English Study Program, Dra. Swesana Mardia Lubis. M.Hum NIP. 19571002 198601 2 003 Approved by the Diploma III of English Study Program Faculty of Culture Study, University of North Sumatera. UNIVERSITAS SUMATERA UTARA As a Paper for the Diploma III Examination Accepted by the Board of Examiners in partial of the requirements for the D-III Examination of the Diploma III English Study Program, Faculty of Culture Study, University of North Sumatera. The examination is held 10th January 2018 Faculty of Culture Study University of North Sumatera Board of Examination : 1. Dra. Swesana Mardia Lubis. M.Hum 2. Dra. Diah Rahayu Pratama. M.Pd 3. Riko Andika Rahmat Pohan. S.S. M.Hum UNIVERSITAS SUMATERA UTARA AUTHOR’S DECLARATION I am, RAHMA KESUMA ANJANI, declare that I am the sole author of this paper. Except where reference is made in the text of this paper, this paper contains no material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a paper by which I have qualified for or awarded another degree. No other person‟s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, and the Spectacle of Masculinity Author(S): Bette London Source: PMLA, Vol
    Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, and the Spectacle of Masculinity Author(s): Bette London Source: PMLA, Vol. 108, No. 2 (Mar., 1993), pp. 253-267 Published by: Modern Language Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/462596 Accessed: 24-02-2018 15:52 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PMLA This content downloaded from 158.135.1.176 on Sat, 24 Feb 2018 15:52:34 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Bette London Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, and the Spectacle of Masculinity BETTE LONDON, associate IN A STRIKING MEMORIAL to the Shelleys-commis- professor of English at the sioned by their only surviving child, Sir Percy, and his wife, Lady Shelley-the couple is impressed in the image of Michelan- University of Rochester, is the gelo's Pietd (fig. 1). Mary Shelley kneels, breast exposed, in the author of The Appropriated traditional posture of a Madonna humilitatis, supporting the lifeless Voice: Narrative Authority in body of her drowned god and idol. Superimposing a Christian Conrad, Forster, and Woolf narrative onto a notorious Romantic "text"-a scandalous life story ( U of Michigan P, 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792–1822) Was an Extraordinary Poet, Playwright, and Essayist, Revolutionary Both in His Ideas and in His Artistic Theory and Practice
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-82604-4 - The Cambridge Companion to Shelley Edited by Timothy Morton Frontmatter More information THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO SHELLEY Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792–1822) was an extraordinary poet, playwright, and essayist, revolutionary both in his ideas and in his artistic theory and practice. This collection of original essays by an international group of specialists is a comprehensive survey of the life, works, and times of this radical Romantic writer. Three sections cover Shelley’s life and posthumous reception; the basics of his poetry, prose, and drama; and his immersion in the currents of philosophical and political thinking and practice. As well as providing a wide- ranging look at the state of existing scholarship, the Companion develops and enriches our understanding of Shelley. Significant new contributions include fresh assessments of Shelley’s narratives, his view of philosophy, and his role in emerging views about ecology. With its chronology and guide to further reading, this lively and accessible Companion is an invaluable guide for students and scholars of Shelley and of Romanticism. © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-82604-4 - The Cambridge Companion to Shelley Edited by Timothy Morton Frontmatter More information THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO SHELLEY EDITED BY TIMOTHY MORTON University of California, Davis © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-82604-4 - The Cambridge Companion to Shelley Edited by Timothy Morton Frontmatter More information cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sa˜o Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru,UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521533430 © Cambridge University Press 2006 This publication is in copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIT TEST STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley English III-1, Mrs
    UNIT TEST STUDY GUIDE QUESTIONS Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley English III-1, Mrs. Edmonds and Mr. Oakley People (both fictional and real-life) you should know from Frankenstein: Victor Frankenstein: creator of the creature and protagonist of the story Henry Clerval: Frankenstein's best friend who is murdered by the creature Elizabeth Lavenza: lived with Frankenstein family; married Victor Robert Walton: explorer who met Frankenstein on the Arctic ice Margaret Saville: recipient of a series of letters from her brother, Robert Walton Justine Moritz: wrongly executed for the murder of young William Frankenstein Percy Shelley: famous real-life British poet and Frankenstein author’s husband Felix De Lacey: unknowingly taught the creature to read and write Alphonse Frankenstein: died of grief in his son's arms after learning that Elizabeth was dead Caroline Beaufort: Frankenstein family matriarch; Victor Frankenstein’s mother Mary Shelley: real-life author of the novel Frankenstein; she wrote the story while on vacation with Percy Shelley (her husband) and Lord Byron (her friend) while on vacation in Switzerland; both Percy Shelley and Lord Byron became world-famous British poets. William Frankenstein: a young boy who was the creature's first victim For the test, be prepared to write an essay to a question similar to the prompt below. We will discuss possible answers in class. Describe the original personality of Dr. Victor Frankenstein’s creature, and the changes that occurred to the creature’s personality over the course of the novel. In coming up with an answer, you might want to address the following questions: What was the creature like when he was first “born”? How did he change and why did he change? What was the creature like at the end of the novel? Be sure to mention the name of the novel and the name of the author somewhere in your answer.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein
    An Introduction to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein By Stephanie Forward Cover illustration courtesy of Stephen Collins This eBook was produced by OpenLearn - The home of free learning from The Open University. It is made available to you under a Creative Commons (BY-NC-SA 4.0) licence. ‘I busied myself to think of a story…One which would speak to the mysterious fears of our nature, and awaken thrilling horror—one to make the reader dread to look round, to curdle the blood, and quicken the beatings of the heart.’ (From Mary Shelley’s Introduction to the 1831 edition of Frankenstein). The life of Mary Shelley (1797- 1851) Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin was born in London on 30 August 1797, to the radical feminist Mary Wollstonecraft and the philosopher William Godwin. Her mother died as a result of complications following the birth, and after Godwin’s second marriage Mary was brought up with two stepsiblings, a half-sister (Fanny Imlay), and a half-brother (named William, after their father). Their home in Holborn was located near the candlelit abattoirs under Smithfield: indeed, the children could hear the screams of animals being slaughtered. On a more positive note Mary benefited from a broad education, enhanced by visits to the household from literary luminaries including William Hazlitt, Charles Lamb and Samuel Taylor Coleridge. At the age of ten she had an amusing poem published: Mounseer Nongtongpaw; or, The Discoveries of John Bull in a Trip to Paris. Unfortunately her relationship with her stepmother was far from cordial, and the onset of eczema when Mary was thirteen may have been partly psychosomatic.
    [Show full text]
  • Haunting the Stage: Danny Boyle's Frankenstein and the Gothic Drama of Modern Subjectivity 13 December 2013
    Haunting the Stage: Danny Boyle’s Frankenstein and the Gothic Drama of Modern Subjectivity 13 December 2013 Osborne 1 Introduction: Positioning the Gothic in Modern Life Recent critical literary interests in Gothic narratives and mythologies have made it so that the Gothic itself has become almost inseparable from modern and postmodern literary genealogies. From Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness to Toni Morrison’s Beloved, Gothic traces are often found in modern and postmodern texts, lingering somewhere between the shadows and the unspoken. Thus literary critics have made efforts to theorize the Gothic on “a continuum with such twentieth-century movements as ‘high’ modernism and surrealism” (Hurley 129-30) and conceding that traditional Gothic terms have been renegotiated in the modern period to operate as technologies that conjure up anxieties found within the modern self (Spooner 40). In a review of Edith Birkhead’s The Tale of Terror (1921), Virginia Woolf comments on her modern contemporaries writing, “It is at the ghosts within that we shudder, and not at the decaying bodies of barons or the subterranean activities of ghouls” (307). What Woolf highlights is “a modernist understanding of the Gothic as interior drama rather than dramatic spectacle,” (Spooner 39) making the line that has historically been drawn between Gothic and modern texts essentially disappear. Just as literary critics find it difficult to demarcate literary periods from each other, defining what Gothic is proves to be equally, if not more difficult. It is obvious that specific tropes found in texts that have been traditionally understood to be Gothic are often considered undisputedly Gothic.
    [Show full text]
  • Mary Shelley's Frankenstein: the Creature's Attempt at Humanization
    University at Albany, State University of New York Scholars Archive English Honors College 5-2011 Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: The Creature’s Attempt at Humanization Noelle Webster University at Albany, State University of New York Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/honorscollege_eng Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Webster, Noelle, "Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: The Creature’s Attempt at Humanization" (2011). English. 7. https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/honorscollege_eng/7 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College at Scholars Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in English by an authorized administrator of Scholars Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: The Creature’s Attempt at Humanization By Noelle Webster May 2011 “I began the creation of a human being” – Victor Frankenstein (Shelley 54). This is a short yet powerful statement from the eponymous character of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Victor Frankenstein is a man from a privileged family who becomes obsessed with pursuing scientific advancements, and is eventually able to create a living being. While Victor does succeed at creating a living being, he does not succeed at creating a human being. The creature becomes excluded from society, and tries to humanize himself through knowledge of language. To begin with I will do a close reading of Mary Shelley’s novel, analyzing selected scenes. I will be looking at what, according to the novel, makes something human and what excludes the creature from humanity. Victor’s creation attempts to humanize himself and become part of society, but ultimately is unable to do so.
    [Show full text]